The revised global definition for social work promotes the profession’s commitment to social change and development, social cohesion and the empowerment and liberation of people. By reviewing the implications of this definitional shift and locating this within existing influential social work ontological models, the implications for social work within global and national contexts are critically reviewed.
Findings
The changes to the global definition, along with recognition of the importance of strengthening knowledge and theory, encourage critical review of the implications of a shift from an emphasis on individual approaches to the importance of collective and macro perspectives in social work intervention. The location and exploration of these debates using existing key ontological frameworks and socio-economic contexts encourages critical reflection on the purpose, role and function of social work in society.
Implications
Social work must critically review what it means by, along with the implications of, the profession’s commitments. The profession needs to consider how theory, its academic discipline and social work interventions support these commitments. The critical examination of ontological frameworks, indigenous knowledge and social work interventions is vital to inform social work education and practice to enable a reinvigorated profession able to address the contemporary challenges of both society and individuals.
AsanteM. K.KarengaM. (2005) Handbook of black studies, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
2.
BeddoeL.MaidmentJ. (2009) Mapping knowledge for social work practice. Critical intersections, South Melbourne, Australia: Cengage Learning.
3.
BrydonK. (2011) Promoting diversity or confirming hegemony? In search of new insights for social work. International Social Work55(2): 155–167. doi:10.1177/0020872811425807.
CareyM.FosterV. (2013) Social work, ideology, discourse and the limits of post-hegemony. Journal of Social Work13(3): 248–266. doi:10.1177/1468017311412032.
6.
Connolly, M., & Harms, L. (Eds). (2009). Social work. Contexts and practice (2nd ed.). South Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.
7.
Council on Social Work Education (2009) Educational policies and accreditation standards, Alexandria, VA: Council on Social Work EducationRetrieved from http://www.cswe.org/File.aspx?id=41861.
8.
DominelliL. (2002) Anti-oppressive social work theory and practice, New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
9.
DowB.McDonaldJ. (2003) Social support or structural change? Social work theory and research on care-giving. Australian Social Work56(3): 197–208. doi:10.1046/j.0312-407x.2003.00083.x.
10.
EdmondsonD. (2014) Social work practice learning: A student guide, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.
11.
FengC. (2014) Thoughts on the professionalization and industrialization of social work in China. Chinese Education and Society46(6): 92–102. doi:10.2753/CED1061-1932460613.
12.
FergusonK. M. (2005) Beyond indigenization and reconceptualisation. Towards a global, multidirectional model of technology transfer. International Social Work48(5): 519–535. doi:10.1177/0020872805055315.
13.
GarrettP. M. (2013) Social work and social theory: Making connections, Bristol, UK: The Policy Press.
14.
GrayM. (2008) Editorial. Postcards from the West: Mapping the vicissitudes of western social work. Australian Social Work61(1): 1–6. doi:10.1080/03124070701827204.
15.
GrayM. (2011) Back to basics: A critique of the strengths perspective in social work. Journal of Contemporary Social Services92(1): 5–11. doi:10.1606/1044-3894.4054.
16.
GrayM.CoatesJ. (2010) ‘Indigenization’ and knowledge development: Extending the debate. International Social Work53(5): 613–627. doi:10.1177/0020872810372160.
17.
GrayM.FookJ. (2004) The quest for a universal social work: Some issues and implications. Social Work Education23(5): 625–644. doi:10.1080/0261547042000252334.
18.
GrayM.MazibukoF. (2002) Social work in South Africa at the dawn of the new millennium. International Journal of Social Welfare11(3): 191–200. doi:10.1111/1468-2397.00216.
19.
HarrisJ. (2003) The social work business, London, UK and New York, NY: Routledge.
HarveyD. (2005) A brief history of neoliberalism, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
22.
HaugE. (2005) Critical reflections on the emerging discourse of international social work. International Social Work48(2): 126–135. doi:10.1177/0020872805050204.
23.
HayC. (2002) Globalization as a problem of political analysis: Restoring agents to a ‘process without a subject’ and politics to a logic of economic compulsion. Cambridge Review of International Affairs15(3): 379–392. doi:0.1080/0955757022000010935.
24.
Healy, L. M., & Link, R. J. (Eds). (2011). Handbook of international social work: Human rights, development, and the global profession. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
25.
HoppsJ. G.LoweT. B. (2008) Social work profession: Overview. In: DavisL. E.MizrahiT. (eds) Encyclopaedia of social work, 20th ed. Washington, DC: NASW Press, pp. 144–156.
26.
HoweD. (1987) An introduction to social work theory, London, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
27.
HuangY. N.ZhangX. (2008) A reflection on indigenization discourse in social work. International Social Work51(5): 611–622. doi:10.1177/0020872808093340.
28.
International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW). (2001). Definition of social work. Retrieved from www.ifsw.org/en/p300208.html.
29.
International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW). (2010). Definition of social work. Retrieved from www.eassw.org/definition.asp.
IoakimidisV. (2013) Beyond the dichotomies of cultural and political relativism: Arguing the case for a social justice based ‘global social work’ definition. Critical and Radical Social Work1(2): 183–199. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/204986013X673254.
32.
JanssonB. S. (2003) Becoming an effective policy advocate: From policy practice to social justice, (4th ed. Pacific Grove, CA: Thomson, Brooks/Cole Pub.
33.
JonesD. N.TruellR. (2012) The global agenda for social work and social development: A place to link together and be effective in a globalized world. International Social Work55(4): 454–472. doi:10.1177/0020872812440587.
34.
Lishman, J. (Ed.). (2007). Handbook for practice learning in social work and social care: Knowledge and theory (2nd ed.). London, UK: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
35.
LorenzW. (2005) Social work and a new social order: Challenging new liberalism’s erosion of solidarity. Social Work and Society3: 93–101. Retrieved from http://www.socwork.net/sws/article/view/205/265.
36.
LymberyM. (2001) Social work at the crossroads. British Journal of Social Work31: 369–384. doi:10.1093/bjsw/31.3.369.
37.
Lyons, K. H., Hokenstad, T., Pawar, M., Huegler, N., & Hall, N. (Eds). (2012). The SAGE handbook of international social work. London, UK: Sage Publications Ltd.
38.
Maidment, J., & Egan, R. (Eds). (2009). Practice skills in social work and welfare: More than just common sense (2nd ed.). Crows Nest, NSW, Australia: Allen and Unwin.
39.
MaryN. L. (2008) Social work in a sustainable world, Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books Inc.
40.
MidgleyJ. (1997) Social welfare in global context, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
41.
MmatliT. (2008) Political activism as social work strategy in Africa. International Social Work51(3): 297–310. doi:10.1177/0020872807083913.
42.
National Association of Social Workers (NASW) (2010) Statement on the purpose of social work, Washington, DC: NASW.
PayneM. (1996) What is professional social work?, Birmingham, UK: Venture Press.
45.
PayneM. (1997) Modern social work theory, (2nd ed. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan.
46.
PayneM.AskelandG. A. (2008) Globalisation and international social work: Postmodern change and challenge, London, UK: Ashgate.
47.
PettiforJ. L. (2004) Professional ethics across national boundaries. European Psychologists9(4): 264–274. doi:10.1027/1016-9040.9.4.264.
48.
PhillipsonR. (1992) Linguistic imperialism, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
49.
RankopoM. J.Osei-HwedieK. (2011) Globalization and culturally relevant social work: African perspectives on indigenization. International Social Work54(1): 137–147. doi:10.1177/0020872810372367.
ReischM.JaniS. (2012) The new politics of social work: Understanding context to promote change. British Journal of Social Work42(6): 1132–1150. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcs072.
52.
RitzerG. (2009) The McDonaldization of Society, Los Angeles: Pine Forge Press.
53.
SpechtH.CourtneyM. (1994) Unfaithful angels: How social work has abandoned its mission, New York, NY: The Free Press.
54.
SpolanderG.EngelbrechtL. K.MartinL.StrydomM.PervovaI.MarjanenP.AdaikalamF. (2014) The implications of neoliberalism for social work: Reflections from a six country international research collaboration. International Social Work57(4): 301–312. doi:10.1177/0020872814524964.
55.
StaniforthB.FoucheC.O’BrienM. (2011) Still doing what we do: Defining social work in the 21st century. Journal of Social Work11(2): 191–208. doi:10.1177/1468017310386697.
56.
ThompsonN. (2010) Theorizing social work practice, Houndmills, UK: Basingstoke.
TsangA. K. T.YanM. (2001) Chinese corpus, western application. The Chinese strategy for engagement with western social work discourse. International Social Work44(4): 433–454. doi:10.1177/002087280104400404.
59.
WebbS. A. (2001) Some considerations on the validity of evidence-based practice in social work. British Journal of Social Work31: 57–79. doi:10.1093/bjsw/31.1.57.
60.
WeldN.AppletonC. (2008) Walking in people’s worlds, Auckland, New Zealand: Pearson Education New Zealand.
61.
WoodwardR. (2013) Some reflections on critical and radical social work literature. Critical and Radical Social Work1(1): 135–140. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/204986013X666045.
62.
YanM. C.CheungK. W. (2006) The politics of indigenization: A case study of development of social work in China. Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare33(2): 63–83. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/jssw/vol33/iss2/5.
63.
YunongH.XiongZ. (2011) Further discussion of indigenization in social work: A response to Gray and Coates. International Social Work55(1): 40–52. doi:10.1177/0020872811406893.
